Nancy, the dam is breaking

[Cyrano]

The calls for impeachment increase by the day (hour?).

Almost everyone understands the downside to impeaching Trump. But not doing so is becoming more and more untenable.

We've gone past "Breaking the norms," and we're in "Can democracy survive" territory.

Trump has thrown up a moat filled with alligators and piranhas and told us to go fuck ourselves. And he's daring us to impeach him.

Take a deep breath and look at this man's history. He's survived through bluff, bluster, threats, and lawsuits (which he's mostly lost). And that's exactly what he's doing now.

And consider this. Many Americans are clueless as to his crimes, corruption, and the total rot that he bestows on everything he touches. Impeachment means public, televised hearings. People who "don't get it" will be given an opportunity to "get it." And "getting it" may turn many of the clueless against him.

Nancy, we're at the point where he must be impeached. Let the Senate do what they will. It's our turn to stand up and say ENOUGH. Stop overthinking it. Do the right thing.

[marble falls]

1. Because we can't wait for President Pence?? Vote Trump out on Nov 3, 2020 ...

I'm much more interested in finding Democrats to run for Republican held Senate seats.

[Grasswire2]

2. bad plan

You are assuming a free and fair election in 2020.

And you are assuming the structures of our democracy will hold until then. I can't.

[marble falls]

8. And you'll get a fair election when Pence is President?? He really and truly believes he sent ...

by G*d. And he is much more acceptable to the GOP than Trump is.

[redstateblues]

32. Where did 3/4 of the Senate magically appear?

[certainot]

17. they'realso gearing up for an ebola scare like in 2014 --- x100. that's why

they're repeating that africans are joining the caravans coming across the border. it will become a 'fact' and a greatly exaggerated one. meanwhile someone (putin?) is causing ebola clinics to be attacked in congo, so it's getting worse.

along with some kremlin calls and emails to radio shows and some trolling it'll help add the fear factor, which makes republican fascist authoritarian certitude more important in elections

[triron]

3. Your comment is just diversion.

[marble falls]

6. Your passion over this is only plaid; 60% cotton, 35% polyester, 5% Spandex ...

Seriously, regaining the Senate is only a diversion. Ask Barack Obama how much he would have appreciated Democratic Congress.

Ask Michael Bennet (D), a U.S. senator from Colorado, announced that he was running for president on May 2, 2019.[3],

Joe Biden (D), a former vice president of the United States, announced that he was running for president on April 25, 2019.[4],

Bill de Blasio (D), the mayor of New York City, announced that he was running for president on May 16, 2019.[5],

Cory Booker (D), a U.S. senator from New Jersey, announced that he was running for president on February 1, 2019.[6],

Steve Bullock (D), the governor of Montana, announced that he was running for president on May 14, 2019.[7],

Pete Buttigieg (D), the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, announced that he was running for president on January 23, 2019.[8],

Julián Castro (D), a former U.S. secretary of housing and urban development and San Antonio mayor, formally announced his candidacy on January 12, 2019.[9],

John Delaney (D), a former U.S. representative from Maryland, filed to run for president on August 10, 2017.,

Tulsi Gabbard (D), a U.S. representative from Hawaii, announced that she had decided to run for president on January 11, 2019.[10],

Kirsten Gillibrand (D), a U.S. senator from New York, announced that she was forming an exploratory committee on January 15, 2019.[11] She officially announced she was running on March 17, 2019.[12],

Mike Gravel (D), a former U.S. senator from Alaska, announced he was running for president on April 2, 2019.[13],

Kamala Harris (D), a U.S. senator from California, announced that she was running for president on January 21, 2019.[14],

John Hickenlooper (D), a former governor of Colorado, announced that he was running for president on March 4, 2019.[15],

Jay Inslee (D), the governor of Washington, announced that he was running for president on March 1, 2019.[16],

Amy Klobuchar (D), a U.S. senator from Minnesota, formally announced she was running for president on February 10, 2019.[17],

Wayne Messam (D), the mayor of Miramar, Florida, announced he was forming an exploratory committee on March 13, 2019.[18],

Seth Moulton (D), a U.S. representative from Massachusetts, announced he was running for president on April 22, 2019.[19],

Beto O'Rourke (D), former U.S. representative from Texas, formally announced he was running for president on March 14, 2019.[20],

Tim Ryan (D), a U.S. representative from Ohio, announced he was running for president on April 4, 2019.[21],

Bernie Sanders (I)[22], a U.S. senator from Vermont, announced that he was running for president on February 19, 2019.[23],

Eric Swalwell (D), a U.S. representative from California, announced that he was running for president on April 9, 2019.,

Elizabeth Warren (D), U.S. senator from Massachusetts, announced she had formed an exploratory committee on December 31, 2018.[24] She formally announced she was running for president on February 9, 2019,

Bill Weld (R), a former governor of Massachusetts, announced that he was running for president on April 15, 2019.[25],

Marianne Williamson (D), an author and lecturer, announced she was running for president on January 28, 2019.[26],

Andrew Yang (D), an entrepreneur and author from New York, filed to run for president on November 6, 2017 about how they'd feel about a Democratic Senate vs a Republican Senate.

[Nasruddin]

16. This is an old joke

There are narcissists everywhere - all of these people see the next president when they look in the mirror.

Without control of the Senate, however, it's not much more than a 4 year opportunity to work on your golf game.
(Hey- even if you control the Senate that's true. Shows you where the real power is.)

[Caliman73]

11. We can chew gum and walk.

Pence will be a lame duck throughout the process. Nothing is getting through anyway. The impeachment proceedings might even throw some unwanted light on Pence.

I am also interested in finding Democrats to run for office. Perhaps the proceedings will light a fire under Democratic Party members and inspire them to get into politics.

[marble falls]

12. Did we know how tochew gum and walk when the Orange Shitgibbon got elected ...

chew gum and walk into the polls on Nov 3, 2020 and dump Trump and Pence. In the meantime we have to take the Senate - which is actually the group that actually CONVICTS in an impeachment.

[gldstwmn]

25. Because we will still have free and fair elections then?

[marble falls]

33. As free as they are now. If we can't keep them from being elected how are we going to impeach ...

him with a GOP Senate??????????

What do you think his backers will feel when the Senate WILL NOT impeach him: maybe re-energized?

I think a lot of the premature calls for impeachment are about humiliating Trump. Don't you guys get it? He's told over 10,000 lies in two years - he has no shame, he can not be publicly humiliated. And the GOP Senate will NEVER convict him. Just might be EXACTLY what he needs to re-energize his supporters.

Do it the simple way: vote the asshat out on November 3, 2020 and pick up as many GOP held Senate seats as possible.

[Caliman73]

43. Planning on it.

In the meantime we can urge the House to do its duty even if we can't get the corrupt Republicans in the Senate to do theirs. Impeachment is not a bad thing for Democrats. It will bring Trump's wrong doing in to sharp relief in the public. Bill Clinton's numbers actually went down during impeachment. He was at an all time high just prior. Granted, the reasons for impeachment for Clinton were ridiculous, which is why he remained pretty popular and even got a sympathy bounce. Republicans did not pay a heavy toll as suggested even though they were on the wrong end of that process.

I am not understanding why there can't be a focus on both.

[OMGWTF]

21. Jailbird Paul Manafort is the one who suggested Pence be VP

I'm betting Pence is filthy with Russian $ and gawd knows what else!

[Chin music]

29. Right. As if Pence is a squeeky clean turd in all of this.

The old, "We can't do______, bc the gop will do _____." Meme has to end. Do what's right. Not what is going to be accepted by the paid-off party of putin.

[marble falls]

34. Dig up some of that crap. Noone else has done it.

[gldstwmn]

20. Pence would be a lame duck, a figurehead. The president

is not above the law and he must not be allowed to continue.

[marble falls]

26. Do you really think Pence would be treated like Obama was as a lame duck? Remember ...

the damage done by GOP lame duck state legislators after last falls elections in places like Minnesota, Wisconsin, South Carolina?

[NewJeffCT]

24. Pence would be infinitely preferable to Trump

Trump has the media wrapped around his finger - he drives the news almost every day.

Pence has 0 charisma and will have no ability to drive the news cycle like Trump.

He will also be tarnished by association with Trump

[progressoid]

38. I'm not so sure.

Pence has the advantage of knowing how government actually works. And the rest of the GOP - particularly the Senate - would rally around him with gusto to advance their programs and protect their power.

[NewJeffCT]

45. the people around Trump know how government works

most of the time.

[LanternWaste]

4. I don't see water lapping at the levy as a breaking dam.

But if anyone wants to provide the actual numbers and analysis to support this Breaking Dam theory, I'd love to see it...

I 'get' numbers. I rarely 'get' allegation.

[coti]

5. "Overthinking it" is exactly it

It shouldn't be this difficult to get our leadership to do what is both morally and politically accurate here.

[Nuggets]

7. When the going gets tough...

the weakest abandon their leaders.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

9. We already are holding public, (b)(i)televised(/i)(/b) hearings on tRump & his cronies. . . . nt

[gldstwmn]

22. They don't show up.

[Goodheart]

10. Apparently, she wants a sure thing.

Which contradicts her many bill passages in this session which had no hope of Republican approval in the Senate.

Which also contradicts DO THE RIGHT THING.

[Duppers]

15. 👏 Thank you!

[Eyeball_Kid]

28. The FUNCTION of impeachment hearings is to

present the case for removal from office. The EVIDENCE for removal is presented for the Senate to consider.

Does Pelosi fear that the evidence is not compelling enough?? What does she want? A command from God?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

40. You are right. The evidence is not compelling enough to obtain conviction in the Senate.

At this time. It will change, just when and by how much is not yet known, but there will be Republicon defectors.

The fault is that of the Republicon Senators, not the evidence.

But Democrats ARE holding hearings and more evidence is being obtained.

[Pepsidog]

13. Even Fox will have to cover the spectacle of impeachment hearings.

[Honeycombe8]

14. Pelosi isn't making this decision alone.

She and the other Democratic leaders will make this decision collectively, I'm sure, based on their years of political and legal experience, and the evidence they know of at the time. They'll hash over the positives and negatives.

It's a very tough decision. I'll support them, whatever their decision.

People keep speaking of "ending" the Trump Terror through impeachment. Impeachment won't end it. It's making a statement for historical purposes, like they did on Bill Clinton.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. But I see far too many posters indicating they think that the House impeaching him would remove him from office, when it won't. (It's a pretty sure thing that McConnell's Senate won't impeach.) So I'm not sure the masses should make the call, when some aren't even clear on what it is and what it would and would not do.

But whatever the leaders decide, I'll support it.

[gldstwmn]

23. The Judiciary Committee has broken ranks

and wants an impeachment inquiry.

[Honeycombe8]

30. I am not finding that.

More than half of the members think that they MAY "eventually" need to open an impeachment inquiry. The Committee has not called for impeachment. They think similarly to what Pelosi and others think. https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/24-house-judiciary-committee-democrats-stand-impeachment

This is part of the process, as they all work through the various things going on, and discuss the various strategies and options and goals.

I support them in their decision, whatever it is. We're in uncharted territory. Lots to think about. Complicated issues. Lots of evidence, most of which Congress doesn't even have in their hands yet, incl. the full Mueller Report.

I'll be so glad when we get rid of Trump. The damage and hate and destruction he has wrought on the country is immeasurable.

[gldstwmn]

39. Nope. I watched Steve Cohen on CNN live last night.

Last edited Tue May 21, 2019, 08:44 PM - Edit history (1)

He and others including Raskin, Cicilline, Lieu, Nadler and Neguse want an impeachment inquiry opened forthwith.
See here:
Democratic Calls for Impeachment Inquiry Grow as Leaders Instead Vow to Toughen Tactic
A bloc of liberal Democratic lawmakers began a new push on Tuesday over the objections of their party’s leaders to open an impeachment inquiry of President Trump, underscoring a divide among House Democrats over how to uphold Congress’s oversight powers in the face of Mr. Trump’s stonewalling.
(snip)
"We can focus on McGahn. We can focus on Barr. We can focus on Michael Cohen. We can call the roll,” Representative Val B. Demings, a Florida Democrat on the Judiciary Committee who supports impeachment, said in an interview. “But the problem here is the president of the United States.”ir concerns that Mr. Trump might be permanently weakening Congress’s powers prompted prominent progressive lawmakers on and off the Judiciary Committee to declare in private meetings and public statements in the past 24 hours that they saw no choice but to initiate an impeachment inquiry.

(snip)
The new supporters of impeachment included Representative Mark Pocan, Democrat of Wisconsin and a co-chairman of the influential Congressional Progressive Caucus, and Representative Mary Gay Scanlon, Democrat of Pennsylvania and the vice chairwoman of the Judiciary Committee.

(snip)
After Ms. Pelosi lamented to members of her leadership team that the battles with the president were overshadowing Democrats’ legislative agenda, Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, argued that opening an impeachment inquiry could help solve the problem by centralizing fights with the White House over documents, according to three people in the room for the exchange, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/21/us/politics/mcgahn-subpoena-house-impeachment.html

[Honeycombe8]

44. That's not the committee. That's a few people on the committee.

You said the Judiciary Committee wants to impeach now. I thought you meant that, but you mean some of the people on that committee.

I'm sure that throughout all the committees, and those not on committees, are some who want to impeach and some who don't (at least not right now).

[gldstwmn]

46. They want to open an impeachment inquiry. Not articles.

[JoeOtterbein]

18. "Do the right thing"

It's a shame when doing the right thing is not what we are doing.

[Baltimike]

19. *NOPE*. NANCY, HOLD THE LINE. Moscow mitch will exonerate him

keep up the investigations.

[USALiberal]

27. I think Nancy knows a lot more about this than you do. nt

[Eyeball_Kid]

31. If she DOES,

And Trumpy is impeached and removed from office, I will happily admit my error for not having faith in her masterful skills.

[bearsfootball516]

37. There's not much she can do about the Senate.

The house is one thing, but even with televised hearings, I wouldn’t expect 20 Republicans to jump ship.

[redstateblues]

35. I'm with Nancy

[FailureToCommunicate]

36. She is addressed: Madame Speaker

Otherwise, I agree with your sense of urgency.

[Duppers]

41. Exactly! Thank you!

[world wide wally]

42. Trump is basically saying, "screw your laws. WTF are you going to do about it?"

To put it n NY street talk.

[GulfCoast66]

47. And when we fail to convict, then what?

Like suddenly republican representatives and voters will have an epiphany and decide to overlook what is clearly right in front of them?

Hell no, they will double down and we will have given trump a victory right before the election.

Keep the drip drip of investigations and the court losses going for him till the election.

And focus like a laser what won us the house, which sure as hell was not impeachment. Bread and butter issues beginning with healthcare. That’s what won 18 and will win 20.